This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: CNN Poll: GOP would bear the brunt of shutdown blame [W:176:468]

Originally Posted by Old English

WAKE UP!

If you don't want to buy the product, then you don't have to, just pay the fine! You're entire argument rests on the assumption that the private sector can provide an essential service--HEALTHCARE IS ESSENTIAL; OTHERWISE, DO YOU SUGGEST THAT WE LET PEOPLE DIE IN THE STREETS?--at an affordable cost; however, the evidence shows that the private sector was unable to do this, and that is why we NEED the government to step in! You have to understand that the interests of the private sector contradict the interests of the citizen, so if you want to blame someone, then blame your own selfish, greedy, egotistic world view which forces government to step in, so that you can then complain about it, while providing no better alternative! So how are you going to solve the healthcare problem again? Oh, wait, you can't answer that question because your only answer is the private sector, which has already proven ineffective.

You can actually blame wage controls instituted during WWII for our current system. I forget, who was the President?

I don't often change my signature, but this was just too over the top to let anyone forget with what this country is up against...

Originally Posted by James D Hill

I am for gay marriage because it ticks off Jesus freaks and social conservatives. Gays are also good voters because the vote for my side so I fight next to them.

Re: CNN Poll: GOP would bear the brunt of shutdown blame [W:176:468]

Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth

FFS, what interest does an admirer of a NAZI tank commander have in Madison.....and why do you think I am in the least interested in following you down your rabbit hole when it continues to ignore the context?

go away.

you tell me to go away, since you have to deflect, and talk about Nazis instead...... please if you cannot formula an argument, when why respond?

Re: CNN Poll: GOP would bear the brunt of shutdown blame [W:176:468]

Originally Posted by clownboy

Sorry, no debate - it's called the tenth amendment.

The tenth ammendment does not say anything about the federal government making a case for aquiring state powers at a later time. The constution does not say that the federal government is limited only to the powers expressly or explicitly delagated to it. That is why there are such things as implied powers and concurant powers.

Re: CNN Poll: GOP would bear the brunt of shutdown blame [W:176:468]

Originally Posted by Old English

WAKE UP!

If you don't want to buy the product, then you don't have to, just pay the fine! You're entire argument rests on the assumption that the private sector can provide an essential service--HEALTHCARE IS ESSENTIAL; OTHERWISE, DO YOU SUGGEST THAT WE LET PEOPLE DIE IN THE STREETS?--at an affordable cost; however, the evidence shows that the private sector was unable to do this, and that is why we NEED the government to step in! You have to understand that the interests of the private sector contradict the interests of the citizen, so if you want to blame someone, then blame your own selfish, greedy, egotistic world view which forces government to step in, so that you can then complain about it, while providing no better alternative! So how are you going to solve the healthcare problem again? Oh, wait, you can't answer that question because your only answer is the private sector, which has already proven ineffective.

Too many silly assumptions. People will just as easily die on the streets under Obamacare as not. There is no difference in emergency care. And private insurance covered more people and better than any other single nation. But you miss the main point, the feds are not empowered by the Constitution to mandate healthcare insurance.

Re: CNN Poll: GOP would bear the brunt of shutdown blame [W:176:468]

Originally Posted by Old English

WAKE UP!

If you don't want to buy the product, then you don't have to, just pay the fine! You're entire argument rests on the assumption that the private sector can provide an essential service--HEALTHCARE IS ESSENTIAL; OTHERWISE, DO YOU SUGGEST THAT WE LET PEOPLE DIE IN THE STREETS?--at an affordable cost; however, the evidence shows that the private sector was unable to do this, and that is why we NEED the government to step in! You have to understand that the interests of the private sector contradict the interests of the citizen, so if you want to blame someone, then blame your own selfish, greedy, egotistic world view which forces government to step in, so that you can then complain about it, while providing no better alternative! So how are you going to solve the healthcare problem again? Oh, wait, you can't answer that question because your only answer is the private sector, which has already proven ineffective.

its clear you have no understanding of the foundering principles, ..what authority does government have to force me to buy a private sector product.

according to that logic, government can force me to buy a car, every 2,4, or 6 years, and if I don't pay a tax.

Re: CNN Poll: GOP would bear the brunt of shutdown blame [W:176:468]

Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13

The tenth ammendment does not say anything about the federal government making a case for aquiring state powers at a later time. The constution does not say that the federal government is limited only to the powers expressly or explicitly delagated to it. That is why there are such things as implied powers and concurant powers.

The only way they have constitutionally of "aquiring state powers at a later time" is through constitutional amendment (or fiat by the SCOTUS). Implied and concurrent powers are based strictly upon enumerated powers.

Re: CNN Poll: GOP would bear the brunt of shutdown blame [W:176:468]

The context was that the teabags want to defund the ACA, to threaten default over the ACA. If the comment that "we are a country of equal opportunity", how is that in opposition to the ACA?

Then you concede to my point.

Primarily based on income.

So?

If a person signs up on the exchanges, when is payment due? At the time they sign up? I'm keeping my BC/BS, so I'm asking because I don't know about what other people are running into. And at what point do the subsidies kick in, and who determines that--the IRS? Sorry to ask so many questions, but you seem to be knowledgable, so you're it!

Re: CNN Poll: GOP would bear the brunt of shutdown blame [W:176:468]

Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13

The tenth ammendment does not say anything about the federal government making a case for aquiring state powers at a later time. The constution does not say that the federal government is limited only to the powers expressly or explicitly delagated to it. That is why there are such things as implied powers and concurant powers.

the constitution list the powers of congress, and their are 18 of them.

the founders are clear government is limited.

“With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.” – James Madison in letter to James Robertson

“[Congressional jurisdiction of power] is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any.” – James Madison, Federalist 14

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined . . . to be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce.” – James Madison, Federalist 45

“If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.” – James Madison, 1792

“The Constitution allows only the means which are ‘necessary,’ not those which are merely ‘convenient,’ for effecting the enumerated powers. If such a latitude of construction be allowed to this phrase as to give any non-enumerated power, it will go to every one, for there is not one which ingenuity may not torture into a convenience in some instance or other, to some one of so long a list of enumerated powers. It would swallow up all the delegated powers, and reduce the whole to one power, as before observed” – Thomas Jefferson, 1791

“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.” – Thomas Jefferson, 1798

There you have it. James Madison, the Constitution’s author and Thomas Jefferson the author of the Declaration of Independence, specifically say that Congressional powers are to be limited and defined – unlike most modern interpretations!

Admittedly, Jefferson and Madison were not our only Founders. These two were strict constitutionalists who feared the potential strength of any government. So let’s look at another Founder’s opinion—Alexander Hamilton who historically saw it in a somewhat looser vain.

“This specification of particulars [the 18 enumerated powers of Article I, Section 8] evidently excludes all pretension to a general legislative authority, because an affirmative grant of special powers would be absurd as well as useless if a general authority was intended.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 83

Hamilton uncategorically states that all congressional powers are enumerated and that the very existence of these enumerations alone makes any belief that Congress has full and general legislative power to act as it desires nonsensical. If such broad congressional power had been the original intent, the constitutionally specified powers would have been worthless. In other words, why even enumerate any powers at all if the General Welfare clause could trump them?

“No legislative act … contrary to the Constitution can be valid. To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 78

In short, Hamilton tells us that since the powers of Congress are enumerated and limit Congress to those powers, any assumed authority outside those specified that don’t have a direct relation to those explicit powers must be contrary to the Constitution and therefore — unconstitutional.

Re: CNN Poll: GOP would bear the brunt of shutdown blame [W:176]

Originally Posted by Mithros

Sorry, I chimed in because you posted a completely false statement. Here are cumulative graphs of private and public sector job growth (through April of this year). At this point their Presidencies, we had lost 1,000,000 private sector jobs under Bush, but gained 2,000,000 under Obama. That's a difference of 3,000,000 private sector jobs.

In contrast, by this point in his presidency Bush had increased the size of the Government workforce by 850,000. Under Obama the government workforce lost 750,000 jobs.

That brings the score to Obama presided over the creation of 3,000,000 more private sector jobs than Bush, while Bush added 1.6 million more government jobs.

Now I'm not going to pretend that job creation under Obama has been good. But Obama has been more successful and achieved more CONSERVATIVE priorities than Bush. Thems are facts. Attachment 67154746Attachment 67154748

Damn I get tired of this slight of hand.

1) This nations population was different. Raw number counts are meaningless. What is the percentage?